On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Gorsal wrote:
> So i've been trying to find two equivalents to keywords in java. The
> first one is synchronized. is there any syncrhonized keyword in
> clojure?
>
(locking obj
(do-something-with obj foo bar))
is equivalent to Java
synchronized (obj) {
obj.
I'm a total noob to Clojure, but my understanding is that Vars
initially have "root" bindings shared by all threads. I think binding
changes a Var so that instead of having a root binding shared by all
threads it now has thread-local binding; changes made to the thread-
local value bound to Var ar
On Oct 26, 9:26 am, John Harrop wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Radford Smith wrote:
>
> > Ruby blocks are anonymous functions with syntax sugar. You could write
> > James' with_open method like this:
>
> > def with_open(stream, &f)
> > f.call(stream)
> > end
>
Yeah, sorry I don't
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 1:09 AM, Chouser wrote:
>(count-nodes "abcde")
>; 6
Yikes.
Maybe special-casing strings would be best: change (seqable? x) into (and
(seqable? x) (not (string? x))). I don't know if Seqable is synonymous with
that; might there be other seqable?s that aren't Seq
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:45 AM, Timothy Pratley
wrote:
>
> This sounds like a neat idea to me. Maybe the way to get the
> 'complexity' is to calculate it at definition, this macro doesn't work
> for obvious reasons:
> (defmacro defnc
> [n & body]
> `(let [f# (defn ~n ~...@body)]
> (alter-m
So i've been trying to find two equivalents to keywords in java. The
first one is synchronized. is there any syncrhonized keyword in
clojure?
More importantly, however, ive been trying to do somethign like this
(proxy [AbstractHandler] []
(execute [~var]
~...@body))
What is the equival
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 10:08 PM, John Harrop wrote:
> Reading http://www.paulgraham.com/power.html and specifically the section
> titled "Metrics" near the top, I realized that it would be very easy to
> calculate such metrics for Lisp code, and it took me literally only seconds
> to hack someth
I'm going to start the Clojure unit in the senior class in a few
weeks. They have done some F# and I will repeat the F# assignments in
Clojure for comparison. They all have some Java and some C++ but the
unit here is just some functional programming without Java interop so
I don't think it matters
This sounds like a neat idea to me. Maybe the way to get the
'complexity' is to calculate it at definition, this macro doesn't work
for obvious reasons:
(defmacro defnc
[n & body]
`(let [f# (defn ~n ~...@body)]
(alter-meta! (var ~n) assoc :complexity (count-nodes ~body))
f#))
But I t
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 11:56 PM, MarkSwanson wrote:
> I'm curious (general Clojure question) about your use of the quoted
> form. The Clojure docs state that this results in an unevaluated form,
> but I had trouble finding more details on this. F.E. I'd like to run
> count-nodes against a compile
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 10:08 PM, John Harrop wrote:
>
> 4 public class NodeCounter {
> 8 public static int countNodes (Object data) {
> 10 if (!(data instanceof Iterable)) return 1;
> 5 int result = 1;
> 8 for (Object e : (Iterable)data) {
> 6 result +
That's interesting.
I ran this against a quoted Clojure fn of mine and received 92.
I'm curious (general Clojure question) about your use of the quoted
form. The Clojure docs state that this results in an unevaluated form,
but I had trouble finding more details on this. F.E. I'd like to run
count
> What do threads have to do with bindings? How would they interact?
Bindings do not propagate between threads, even if the new thread is
created within a binding form.
Threads are created with a fresh environment; the values of vars in a
new thread are the root bindings (the thread-global
Here's something that I've been confused about for a long time:
I've read many, many times that binding allows you to give to vars
"thread-specific values", and that vars have a "thread-global value"
too. I think that I understand how vars and binding work, but I don't
understand how binding is n
Reading http://www.paulgraham.com/power.html and specifically the section
titled "Metrics" near the top, I realized that it would be very easy to
calculate such metrics for Lisp code, and it took me literally only seconds
to hack something in Clojure:
user=> (defn count-nodes [data] (if (clojure.c
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Mark Volkmann wrote:
>
> I gave a talk on STM at a conference in St. Louis called "Strange
> Loop" last Thursday.
>
That is the most awesome title for a conference, ever. (Said the guy who
just finished GEB: an EGB).
> 1 up and 2 up PDF versions of the slides ar
Excellent; this is perfect. I wonder why I didn't find it when I
searched the docs...thanks a lot, though.
On Oct 25, 3:16 pm, Phil Hagelberg wrote:
> samppi writes:
> > with-meta's behavior is annoying for me. I often have something like
> > this:
>
> > (defn a [blah] (with-meta blah {:type
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Michel Salim
wrote:
>
> Jim was working on logic programming in Clojure up to a few months
> ago, and it seems as if the concern was that the code was too
> derivative.
>
> I have recently made available a Scala-based Kanren implementation;
> the differences betw
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Radford Smith wrote:
>
> Ruby blocks are anonymous functions with syntax sugar. You could write
> James' with_open method like this:
>
> def with_open(stream, &f)
> f.call(stream)
> end
>
> The equivalent in Clojure is effectively the same:
>
> (defn with-open [s
+1. I find Clojure error messages a little bit cryptic, and this is a nice
effort to change this.
2009/10/25 MarkSwanson
>
> Hello,
>
> Someone recently posed the question: (why doesn't this work)
> (into {} (map #([% (* % %)]) [1 2 3 4]))
>
> (reference:
> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure
Thanks for the help Lauri!
John
On Oct 25, 10:29 am, Lauri Pesonen wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> 2009/10/25 jsrodrigues :
>
>
>
> > When I try the following:
> > user=> (into {} (map #([% (* % %)]) [1 2 3 4]))
>
> The #(...) form assumes that the is a function call and thus it is
> implicitly wrapped i
Ruby blocks are anonymous functions with syntax sugar. You could write
James' with_open method like this:
def with_open(stream, &f)
f.call(stream)
end
The equivalent in Clojure is effectively the same:
(defn with-open [stream f]
(f stream))
On Oct 25, 9:31 am, James Reeves wrote:
> I don'
samppi writes:
> with-meta's behavior is annoying for me. I often have something like
> this:
>
> (defn a [blah] (with-meta blah {:type ::incredible}))
> (defn b [foo] (with-meta (a foo) {::b 2}))
>
> I'd like ^(b []) to be {:type ::incredible, ::b 2}. But with-meta
> overwrites the metadata
with-meta's behavior is annoying for me. I often have something like
this:
(defn a [blah] (with-meta blah {:type ::incredible}))
(defn b [foo] (with-meta (a foo) {::b 2}))
I'd like ^(b []) to be {:type ::incredible, ::b 2}. But with-meta
overwrites the metadata from a completely. Is there a
> But whilst this is useful, this doesn't really demonstrate why macros
> are so powerful. Macros are useful because they automatically
> rearrange your source code into something else. They're most similar
> to the Ruby 'eval' function, but operate of data structures rather
> than strings.
>
Nitp
so i was using haskell, and the pointfree stuff is fun, so naturally i
had to implement some of it in clojure.
this is what i have so far. library and examples within:
http://github.com/hclarke/pointfree-clojure
it has >>>, &&&, ***, +++, |||, and others
they take functions as arguments and retu
Ok, I see now I should not post patches here because it messes up the
formatting. I can't seem to find an option to paste text.
I've placed the patch here:
http://www.scheduleworld.com/sw2/arity.patch.gz
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because yo
+1, This would have helped me a lot when I first came to Clojure (from
a non-lisp background).
On Oct 25, 11:57 am, MarkSwanson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Someone recently posed the question: (why doesn't this work)
> (into {} (map #([% (* % %)]) [1 2 3 4]))
>
> (reference:http://groups.google.com/gro
Thanks Lauri. I was stuck on this too.
FYI this issue prompted me to submit a patch to improve the arity
error message:
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/de969a419a535a82
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are s
Hello,
Someone recently posed the question: (why doesn't this work)
(into {} (map #([% (* % %)]) [1 2 3 4]))
(reference:
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/7d3ee57ee8041353)
The error message was:
Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Wrong number of args
pass
Hi John,
2009/10/25 jsrodrigues :
>
> When I try the following:
> user=> (into {} (map #([% (* % %)]) [1 2 3 4]))
The #(...) form assumes that the is a function call and thus it is
implicitly wrapped in parens. That is, #(+ % %) becomes (fn [x] (+ x
x)). So in your code the anonymous function bo
Hi,
I'm trying to find the #(...) equivalent of (fn [] ...) for the
following case:
user=> (into {} (map (fn [x] [x (* x x)]) [1 2 3 4]))
{4 16, 3 9, 2 4, 1 1}
When I try the following:
user=> (into {} (map #([% (* % %)]) [1 2 3 4]))
I get the error:
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.Illeg
I don't think that's a very good example of what macros can do. As you
point out, you can do much the same thing in Ruby with blocks:
with_open(MyStream.new) do |stream|
stream.write "Hello"
end
In Clojure, blocks are analogous to anonymous functions. So the
equivalent Clojure would be:
(with
hi,
I'm new to lisp/clojure
in general. I was reading the free whitepaper from Amit
Rathore's 'Clojure in Action' where he gives a simple
example on macros.
In the example on page 9 he shows how you might do an
audited connection in java:
public void addExpense(long userId, Date date, BigDecima
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 8:36 PM, MarkSwanson wrote:
>
> I'm confused about the slide on barging:
>
> "txnB has a status of RUNNING and can be changed to KILLED".
>
> Are you implying that simply having a status of RUNNING is all that is
> required for the txn to be killed?
> Or, are there other r
35 matches
Mail list logo
